Apparently, The Washington Post is completely abandoning the idea of hosting exclusive salons with power brokers – an idea which erupted into scandal last week when a marketing flyer indicated lobbyists could pay for access to Post reporters.

Now, the paper has apologized blaming the flyer on a marketing snafu but taking responsibility for the bad idea of hosting exclusive dinners:

Our mistake was to suggest that we would hold and participate in an off-the-record dinner with journalists and power brokers paid for by a sponsor. We will not organize such events. As publisher it is my job to ensure that we adhere to standards that are consistent with our integrity as a news organization.

I’m glad the Post has apologized for their questionably ethical idea. But I do wonder what would have happened if POLITICO and other news organizations hadn’t broken the story. I guess it’s a good thing that there are watchdogs watching the watchdogs.

The Washington Post has found itself embroiled in an ethics scandal involving a poorly conceived money-raising venture that the paper has moved fast to cancel and excuse:

Washington Post publisher Katharine Weymouth said today she was canceling plans for an exclusive “salon” at her home where for as much as $250,000, the Post offered lobbyists and association executives off-the-record access to “those powerful few” — Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and even the paper’s own reporters and editors.

Word of this leaked after a flyer distributed to lobbyists made its way into the hands of POLITICO. Post editors claim the flyer originated from the marketing department and no editor or reporter ever agreed to attend an event where lobbyists and government officials could pay for access to the editorial staff. This may be true, but it’s hard to believe such a major undertaking was planned and marketed without the knowledge of the paper’s top brass.

In fact, Weymouth has admitted the paper is looking for new ways to make money:

“We do believe that there is a viable way to expand our expertise into live conferences and events that simply enhances what we do – cover Washington for Washingtonians and those interested in Washington,” she said. “ And we will begin to do live events in ways that enhance our reputation and in no way call into question our integrity.”

Sounds to me that the Post would very much like to leverage its role as a local powerbroker in order to stave off its mounting business losses. But even if no member of the editorial staff were to attend pay-for-access events hosted by the Post, is it really a good idea for a newspaper to be charging members of a community for the opportunity to meet one another? Should the Post really be facilitating and profiting from events where lobbyists and politicians can schmooze?

I don’t think the answer to that is obvious. I firmly believe we still need a professional print news media and understand that untraditional revenue sources will likely be needed if newspapers are to survive. I just question whether or not the newspaper as local powerbroker/elite salon operator is really going to preserve the kind of journalistic integrity we want out of the print media. At what point does keeping the local power players happy outweigh the factual reportage of the news?

Clearly the Post is still working out the kinks in their new moneymaking scheme. We’ll see if they find a way to prop up their bottom line without sabotaging their core mission.

This is Danielle Ivory, reporting from the American News Project and Alternet.

Back in February, in the House Financial Service Committee, when asked a question about the value of Citigroup’s assets, CEO Vikram Pandit provided a less-than-clear response: “It’s an extraordinarily difficult question.”

Click the video below to WATCH the exchange between Rep. Louis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Vikram Pandit.

Rob Weissman, director of the corporate watchdog group, Essential Action, and author of a new report called Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America, said that, in addition to what Pandit said, there’s an additional factor that could fog the test results: off-the-book assets.

“If you don’t include the off-balance sheet assets in the stress test, then it’s not a legitimate stress test,” Weissman said. “It’s pretty plain that the off-balance-sheet operations are a central part of the story of why we don’t know what the banks own.” The Treasury Department declined to comment on whether they would take off-book-assets into account when running the stress tests.

Weissman says that recipients of bailout money, like Citigroup, Bank of America and JP Morgan, have been engaging in “fanciful accounting” of what they owe and what they own by relocating of their less-than-healthy assets off the books, in shadow corporations. Rep. Brad Sherman has described the process as, “apples on one balance sheet and oranges on another.”

According to RGE Monitor, off-balance-sheet operations have skyrocketed over the last 15 years. From 1992 to 2007, on-balance-sheet assets grew by 200 percent, while off-balance-sheet assets grew by 1,518 percent. In 2007, it was estimated that there was 15.9 times more money parked in off-balance-sheet operations than in on-the-book operations. Not all off-book assets are toxic. Some financial institutions might park assets off their books if they are planning, for instance, to sell them. However, in rough economic times, off-balance sheet accounting allows banks to veil their losses from investors, regulators, and even insiders.

“This turns out to be a really important benefit [for a bank] if it happens to be insolvent,” Weissman added. “And many believe that if you total Citigroup’s assets and liabilities, it is insolvent.”

As of July, Citigroup appeared to have the most off-book assets — an estimated $1.1 trillion. But they aren’t alone. As of July 2008, JP Morgan Chase & Co. had more than $400 billion off their books. Bank of America had $48.2 billion off the books before it bought Merrill Lynch. “If you start adding up all the potential exposures, it’s a huge number,” Sam Golden, former ombudsman for the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, told Bloomberg. “The banks will say that it was disclosed. Investors are saying, ‘Yeah, but it was cryptic.’”

Disclosure rules for off-balance sheet operations are notably less strict than those for assets on the books. Neri Bukspan, chief accountant for Standard & Poor’s told Bloomberg, “A lot of information tends to disappear.”

The use of the off-balance-sheet assets was a core part of the Enron scandal, where they were able to wrap debt inside of debt, using obscure corporations, so no one could track what they owed and what they owned. After the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was set in place, there were efforts to address the problems with off-book assets. But after heavy lobbying by two main trade groups, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the American Securitization Forum, banks were given special exemptions.

In September of 2008 as the financial crisis was coming into full view, the Senate Baking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee held a hearing, discussing off-balance sheet operations. Senator Jack Reed recalled Enron: “This phenomenon of moving assets off the balance sheets is eerily familiar. We recall back in the days of Enron that its schemes to manufacture false profits included special purpose entities that conducted transactions off-balance sheet. The goal was to avoid financial reporting. While no one is necessarily suggesting scandals of the Enron kind, we cannot fail to admit the irony. We are dealing with a similar problem yet again, only six years later.”

George P. Miller, Executive Director of the American Securitization Forum, said that moving assets off-book back on to the books would cause dangerous swelling of balance sheets. He added, “There are many other steps that the industry can and should undertake to promote broader and better transparency about risk exposures in these vehicles, whether they are on or off-balance sheet.”

But Donald Young, former member of the Financial Accounting Standards Board countered, “We just had an investment bank [Lehman Brothers] go bankrupt with a fair value balance sheet that showed it had plenty of assets and liabilities. And it almost seems like financial reporting is out of control and not trusted and not believed in. And I think what we do here has got to establish transparency. If the transparency is such that we’re going to bring out some bad news that wasn’t there before, that’s a risk. But I think the benefits of reestablishing confidence in the markets will overwhelm that.”

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) are revising the rules so some off-book assets will have to be reported on the books. However, the changes won’t be effective until January 2010 at the earliest. In March at a House Financial Services Subcommittee hearing, Rep. Sherman complained about this lag. He told the chairman of the FASB, Bob Herz, “If you guys can’t act quickly and logically, perhaps the regulatory accountants need to act and depart from what is a somewhat illogical and certainly slow process that you’ve got.”

In the meantime, in a recent letter to his employees, Pandit has said Citigroup is having its best quarter since 2007 and the bank had conducted its own internal stress tests with positive results. But Weissman says something doesn’t add up. “Either they’ve done a lot of due diligence in a short amount of time that they hadn’t done before, or the stories are incompatible.”

Crossposted at Alternet.

It is.

But $2 trillion is.. ridiculous.

This is Danielle Ivory from ANP.

Congress and the new administration have been focusing their attention on strengthening oversight for the Treasury’s TARP program, but meanwhile few are paying any attention to the Federal Reserve.

Since September, the Fed has lent out about $2 trillion (Bloomberg reported 1.2 trillion in November), but it’s keeping the names of its recipients a big secret.

And while the Treasury’s bailout package has a $700 billion cap, there’s no limit to how much money the Fed can lend.

The American News Project sat down with Washington newcomer, Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), who actually used his five minutes of valuable Q & A time in a Financial Services hearing to do some serious Fed fact-finding.

You can see the story or get the embed code here.

Or follow Danielle’s reporting on twitter here.

And visit Acorn Project for more music like this.

This is Lagan from ANP,

We sat down with James Risen, the New York Times national security corespondent who broke the domestic wiretapping stories, to talk about the dilemmas Obama faces with the unparalleled executive power he will inherit.

Dick Cheney recently said that Obama would appreciate all of the power they are handing over, but Obama has railed against some of the Bush administration’s policies such as the warrantless wiretapping that Risen helped uncover.

A few days after this interview was filmed, one of Risen’s key sources, Thomas Tamm, was featured on the cover of Newsweek as “The Fed Who Blew the Whistle.” Risen spoke with us about the rise in executive power during Bush’s tenure and how the media failed to be vigilant in the wake of 9/11.

From his perch at the New York Times, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist James Risen has been at the forefront of uncovering some of the Bush administration’s worst abuses of power. As a result, he has been hauled before a grand jury and pressured by the government to name his anonymous sources.

Here’s a first look at Jay Inslee, who appears on the shortlists for Prez-Elect Obama’s Secretary of the Interior and Secretary of Energy..

First, Rep. Henry Waxman and Rep. Howard Berman of California…

Senator Obama’s vision for change has inspired tens of millions of Americans,” Chairman Waxman said. “And he’s also proved that he has the experience, judgment, integrity, and toughness to bring real reform to Washington. [...]

“Barack Obama has laid out a foreign policy vision driven by principle and conviction, and he understands that our moral authority and our safety as a nation go hand in hand,” Chairman Berman said. “I spoke with him about a number of foreign policy issues that most concern me. He assured me that he shares my views. The moment President Obama takes office, we’ll send a powerful message to the world that America is back and ready to lead again—that we haven’t abandoned the values that made us the light of the world, and neither should anyone else.”

Then, Rep. Jim McDermott…

Rep. Jim McDermott on Thursday became the fourth U.S. House member from Washington to endorse Barack Obama for president.

The Seattle Congressman told the P-I’s Joel Connelly that Obama is his pick because “I am confident as president he will end the war in Iraq and bring our sons and daughters home.”

Last, D.C. superdelegate and president of the Communications Workers of America, Larry Cohen…

In a statement, Cohen said that Obama “is building a broad base of support, inspiring new voters to join in the political process and demonstrating great appeal to all those who are looking for positive leadership to move us beyond politics-as-usual in Washington.”

Cohen also praised Clinton as “an excellent candidate and a staunch friend and advocate for American working men and women.”

Post-Pennsylvania Delegate Pickups:
Obama – 62.5
Clinton – 14.5

Total Superdelegates:
Obama – 293.5
Clinton – 273.5

Total Delegates Needed To Clinch
Clinton – 306.5
Obama – 133.5

Total post-PA pickups after the jump…

Obama superdelegate pickups:
Jim McDermott (WA), Representative – May 15, 2008
Larry Cohen (D.C.), DNC – May 15, 2008
Henry Waxman (CA), Representative – May 15, 2008
Howard Berman (CA), Representative – May 15, 2008
Mike Morgan (OK), DNC – May 14, 2008
Lena Taylor (WI), DNC – May 14, 2008
Awais Khaleel (WI), DNC – May 14, 2008
Lauren Wolfe (MI), DNC – May 14, 2008
Christine Schon Marques (DA), Chair – May 14, 2008
Pete Visclosky (IN), Representative – May 14, 2008
Anita Bonds (DC), DNC – May 13, 2008
Roy Romer (CO), DNC – May 13, 2008
Joe Donnelly (IN), Representative – May 13, 2008
Ray Nagin (LA), DNC – May 13, 2008
Daniel Akaka (HI), Senator – May 12, 2008
Dolly Strazar (HI), DNC – May 12, 2008
R. Keith Roark (ID), Dem Chairman – May 12, 2008
Tom Allen (ME), Representative – May 12, 2008
Crystal Strait (CA), DNC – May 11, 2008
Harry Mitchell (AZ), Representative – May 10, 2008
Dave Regan (OH), Add-On – May 10, 2008
Kevin Rodriguez (VI), DNC – May 10, 2008
Carol Burke (VI), DNC – May 10, 2008
Kristi Cumming (UT), Add-On – May 10, 2008
Joe Johnson (VA), DNC – May 9, 2008
Vernon Watkins (CA), DNC – May 9, 2008
Wilber Lee Jeffcoat (SC), DNC Vice Chairman – May 9, 2008
Laurie Weahkee (NM), DNC – May 9, 2008
Mazie Hirono (HI), Representative – May 9, 2008
Ed Espinoza (CA), DNC – May 9, 2008
John Gage (MD), DNC – May 9, 2008
Peter DeFazio (OR), Representative – May 9, 2008
Donald Payne (NJ), Representative – May 9, 2008
Rick Larsen (WA), Representative – May 8, 2008
Brad Miller (NC), Representative – May 8, 2008
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Inola Henry (CA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Jerry Meek (NC), Dem Chairman – May 7, 2008
Jeanette Council (NC), DNC – May 7, 2008
Lauren Dugas Glover (MD), DNC Vice Chairman – May 5, 2008
Michael Cryor (MD), DNC Chairman – May 5, 2008
Kalyn Free (OK), DNC – May 5, 2008
Jaime Paulino (Guam), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – May 4, 2008
Parris Glendening (MD), Governor – May 3, 2008
Inez Tenenbaum (SC), DNC – May 3, 2008
Brian Colón (TX), DNC – May 3, 2008
Paul G. Kirk, Jr. (MA), DNC – May 2, 2008
John Patrick (TX), DNC – May 1, 2008
Barbara Flynn Currie (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Todd Stroger (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Richard M. Daley (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008
Bruce Braley (IA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Lois Capps (CA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Baron Hill (IN), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Ben Chandler (KY), Representative – Apr 29, 2008
Richard Machacek (IA), DNC – Apr 29, 2008
Jeff Bingaman (NM), Senator – Apr 28, 2008
Charlene Fernandez (AZ), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 26, 2008
David Wu (OR), Representative – Apr 24, 2008
Audra Ostergard (NE), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 23, 2008
Brad Henry (OK), Governor – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate pickups:
Vicki Harwell (TN), Add-On – May 14, 2008
Arthur Powell (MA), Add-On – May 10, 2008
Ciro Rodriguez (TX), Representative – May 9, 2008
Chris Carney (PA), Representative – May 9, 2008
Brad Ellsworth (IN), Representative – May 7, 2008
Heath Shuler (NC), Representative – May 7, 2008
Theresa Morelli (Dems Abroad), DNC May 5, 2008
Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (MD), Lt. Governor – May 3, 2008
Jaime A. Gonzalez Jr. (TX), DNC – May 2, 2008
Andrew Cuomo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Thomas DiNapoli (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
C. Virginia Field (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Carmen Arroyo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
John Olsen (CT), DNC – May 1, 2008
Luisette Cabanas (PR), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – Apr 30, 2008
William George (PA), DNC – Apr 30, 2008
Ike Skelton (MO), Representative, Apr 29, 2008
Mike Easley (NC), Governor – Apr 28, 2008
Kathy Sullivan (NH), Add-On – Apr 26, 2008
John Tanner (TN), Representative – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate losses:
Kevin Rodriguez (VI), DNC – May 10, 2008
Donald Payne (NJ), Representative – May 9, 2008
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Arlene P. Bordallo (Guam), DNC & Former Territory Vice Chair- May 4, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008

The Hill has the details…

Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) surprise visit Thursday to the House floor has already paid dividends in the form of a superdelegate endorsement.

Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) announced, after meeting with Obama at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee headquarters, that he would endorse the Illinois senator for president.

Larsen had planned to delay an endorsement until after Democrats voted in the last primaries in South Dakota and Montana. But the lawmaker said Obama’s performance in Tuesday’s primaries in North Carolina and Indiana changed his mind.

“For me, what happened in North Carolina and Indiana ended up being a game changer,” said Larsen. “Especially in Indiana where he came back after getting hit hard for a couple of weeks.”

Obama now leads in post-Pennsylvania pickups 29 to 12.5, and the overall super totals are Clinton – 273.5, Obama – 262.

Total pickups after the jump…

Obama superdelegate pickups:
Rick Larsen (WA), Representative – May 8, 2008
Brad Miller (NC), Representative – May 8, 2008
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Inola Henry (CA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Jerry Meek (NC), Dem Chairman – May 7, 2008
Jeanette Council (NC), DNC – May 7, 2008
Lauren Dugas Glover (MD), DNC Vice Chairman – May 5, 2008
Michael Cryor (MD), DNC Chairman – May 5, 2008
Kalyn Free (OK), DNC – May 5, 2008
Jaime Paulino (Guam), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – May 4, 2008
Parris Glendening (MD), Governor – May 3, 2008
Inez Tenenbaum (SC), DNC – May 3, 2008
Brian Colón (TX), DNC – May 3, 2008
Paul G. Kirk, Jr. (MA), DNC – May 2, 2008
John Patrick (TX), DNC – May 1, 2008
Barbara Flynn Currie (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Todd Stroger (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Richard M. Daley (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008
Bruce Braley (IA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Lois Capps (CA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Baron Hill (IN), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Ben Chandler (KY), Representative – Apr 29, 2008
Richard Machacek (IA), DNC – Apr 29, 2008
Jeff Bingaman (NM), Senator – Apr 28, 2008
Charlene Fernandez (AZ), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 26, 2008
David Wu (OR), Representative – Apr 24, 2008
Audra Ostergard (NE), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 23, 2008
Brad Henry (OK), Governor – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate pickups:
Brad Ellsworth (IN), Representative – May 7, 2008
Heath Shuler (NC), Representative – May 7, 2008
Theresa Morelli (Dems Abroad), DNC May 5, 2008
Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (MD), Lt. Governor – May 3, 2008
Jaime A. Gonzalez Jr. (TX), DNC – May 2, 2008
Andrew Cuomo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Thomas DiNapoli (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
C. Virginia Field (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Carmen Arroyo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
John Olsen (CT), DNC – May 1, 2008
Luisette Cabanas (PR), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – Apr 30, 2008
William George (PA), DNC – Apr 30, 2008
Ike Skelton (MO), Representative, Apr 29, 2008
Mike Easley (NC), Governor – Apr 28, 2008
Kathy Sullivan (NH), Add-On – Apr 26, 2008
John Tanner (TN), Representative – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate losses:
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Arlene P. Bordallo (Guam), DNC & Former Territory Vice Chair- May 4, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008

The Huckabee Presidential Campaign will be exploring all available legal options regarding the dubious final results for the state of Washington State Republican precinct caucuses, it was announced today. Campaign Chairman Ed Rollins issued the following statement:

“The Huckabee campaign is deeply disturbed by the obvious irregularities in the Washington State Republican precinct caucuses. It is very unfortunate that the Washington State Party Chairman, Luke Esser, chose to call the race for John McCain after only 87 percent of the vote was counted. According to CNN, the difference between Senator McCain and Governor Huckabee is a mere 242 votes, out of more than 12,000 votes counted-with another 1500 or so votes, apparently, not counted. That is an outrage.

“In other words, more than one in eight Evergreen State Republicans have been disenfranchised by the actions of their own party. This was an error in judgment by Mr. Esser. It was Mr. Esser’s duty to oversee a fair vote-count process. Washington Republicans know, from bitter experience in the 2004 gubernatorial election, the terrible results that can come from bad ballot-counting.

“Frankly, I am disappointed in the way that Mr. Esser has handled this urgent matter. So I call upon Mr. Esser and his colleagues to cooperate fully with the Huckabee campaign-and all Republicans, everywhere, who care about honest and transparent vote-counting-to make sure that every vote is counted and that all Republicans in Washington have the chance to make their votes count. Attempts by our campaign to contact Mr. Esser have been unsuccessful. Our lawyers will be on the ground in Washington State soon, and we look forward to sitting down with Mr. Esser to evaluate this process, to see why the count took so long, and why the vote-counting was stopped prematurely.

“It would be a disservice to every voter in Washington State to not pursue a full accounting of all votes cast.

“This is not about Mike Huckabee. This is not about Senator John McCain. This is about the failings of the Washington State Republican Party. All Republicans should unite to demand an honest accounting of the votes, so that Republicans can have full confidence in the results, and full confidence in the eventual Republican nominee. As I said, we are prepared to go to court, and we are also prepared to take our case all the way to the Republican National Convention in September.

“Our cause is just. We must reemphasize the sacred American principle that all ballots be counted in a free, fair, and transparent manner.”

He has dispatched his lawyers to the state.

We’ll have more as it develops…

TPM weighs in on how weird this is…

As you know, John McCain lost two of the three contests yesterday. He was losing narrowly in Washington state and then pulled ahead by a narrow margin (less than two points) toward the end. But then with 87% of the returns counted, the Washington state GOP, which runs the caucuses stopped releasing results. That left us and a lot of other news organizations in a bit of a quandary last night since it looked like McCain was going to pull it off. But as late as 1:30 AM on the east coast promised new results kept failing to materialize.

Then we have Huckabee on Meet The Press this morning…

I’ll be curious to see how this plays out. It’s very weird that they wouldn’t release the results.

What’s going on?

UPDATE:
So they stopped counting?

The Washington State GOP, with 87.2 percent reporting, discontinued the counting process. We are looking into the matter. We are committed to making certain EVERY vote is counted. We will keep you posted.

That’s from the Huckabee campaign.

Again, what the hell is going on?

With 73% reporting in Nebraska, Obama leads 69% to 31%. I think we can call that one for him now.

What will happen? Here are some guesses…

Washington primary, 78 delegates:

Lay of the land: Obama is thought to have an advantage in the caucuses, which are dominated by party activists, especially in liberal Seattle. However, Washington has a strong history of electing women.

Both senators from the state are women and have endorsed Clinton. Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire has not yet made her pick but said she would before the caucuses. (Justin’s note: Gregoire has since endorsed Obama)

Louisiana primary, 56 delegates:

Lay of the land: A heavy turnout by black voters would benefit Obama. The state is close to one-third black and has only a small population of Hispanics, a group that has favored Clinton.

Nebraska caucuses, 24 delegates:

Lay of the land: The Clinton campaign claimed a strong grass-roots organization. Obama has been endorsed by state party leaders and lawmakers as well as by Sen. Ben Nelson, the only Democratic member of the state’s congressional delegation.

Maine caucuses, 24 delegates:

Lay of the land: Gov. John Baldacci is backing Clinton, and led several dozen state lawmakers in a rally for her Thursday. Obama swept up $400,000 in a visit to Portland in September, in one demonstration of his drawing power in the state, said Maine House Speaker Glenn Cummings, who backs him.

Virgin Islands caucuses, 3 delegates:

Lay of the land: In November, Obama attracted more than 100 supporters to a one-hour reception in St. Thomas that cost up to $2,300 to attend.

Conclusion: most think Obama has the advantage this weekend since Hillary hasn’t been too aggressive in these states.

I guess we’ll see.